Question about uid_sequence

Sebastian Spaeth Sebastian at
Mon Aug 29 15:25:18 BST 2011

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:26:27 +0200, Vincent Beffara <vbeffara at> wrote:
> Just a completely minor question:

Nah, it's not minor :) 
> The new uid_sequence() function is great looking, but the odd thing is
> that it does not sort its input; together with sqlite which seems to
> give answers in a random order, this leads to mixed lists that would be
> more compactable than they look.
> Why not sort the uidlist before compacting ? Is there a problem I dont
> see somewhere ? The increase in CPU usage would likely be very small ...

It does not sort because the old joinlist did not and I did not want to
modify behavior. Also I thought that sorting is probably not required as
we would most of the time have already sorted values from the IMAP

Nothing speaks against sorting the lists besides some wasted CPU powers
in case everything is already sorted.

Care to whip up the patch? :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the OfflineIMAP-project mailing list